Paul J. Bennett (2018)

THE STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

SUPREME COURT

ORDER LD-2016-0017, In the Matter of Paul J. Bennett, Esquire On November 7, 2017, the Attorney Discipline Office (ADO) filed a certified copy of documents in State of New Hampshire v. Paul Bennett, showing that the respondent, Attorney Paul J. Bennett, had pleaded guilty and was convicted of two charges of sale of a controlled drug and one charge of common nuisance. All three crimes are class B felonies. The crime of sales of a controlled drug and the crime of common nuisance are each considered a “serious crime, ” as that term is defined in Supreme Court Rule 37(9)(b). Subparagraph 9(d) of the rule provides that “[u]pon the receipt of a certificate of conviction of an attorney for a ‘serious crime, ’ the court may, and shall if suspension has been ordered pursuant to subsection (a) above, institute a formal disciplinary proceeding by issuing an order to the attorney to show cause why the attorney should not be disbarred as result of the conviction.” In accordance with this rule, on December 1, 2017, and again on December 13, 2017, the court issued an order requiring the respondent to show cause why he should not be disbarred as a result of the conviction. The respondent filed no response to the order. In light of the seriousness of the respondent’s misconduct, the court concludes that the respondent should be disbarred. THEREFORE, the court orders that Paul J. Bennett be disbarred from the practice of law in New Hampshire. He is hereby assessed all expenses incurred by the Professional Conduct Committee in the investigation and prosecution of this matter. Lynn, C.J., and Hicks, Bassett, Hantz Marconi, and Donovan, JJ., concurred. DATE: May 22, 2018 ATTEST: & Eileen Fox, Clerk